Yes, I'm afraid he is very weak willed and sly - he's like the character on the Fast Show that didn't have an opinion and always agreed with the last person who spoke.

But is this the first time we've heard it straight from the horses mouth before? I can't recall. If it is, then I do think it's understandable as a "point of no return" for some - as in, if it's always been just rumours and conjecture in the past (genuinely cannot remember either way).

Must note, I am a "since 2000" fan and I am not giving up on the show, but I see a lot of hardcore fans are.

As you should as well as its good entertainment.
Just for gods sake don't vote on it ever again though. You wouldn't bet money on a wrestling match would you so don't vote on this show.

ROFL ..............love that analogy.

He has come across as very duplicitous on a number of occasions.

Well, one things that's a positive, at least the votes haven't been fixed (and I truly believe that), you see what happened to ITV with their Ant and Dec SNT phone thing. Ch5 wouldn't risk it.

But my source told me Giant Haystacks was a dead cert!

You're welcome
I'll say no more about it as I doubt that I'll be able to muster up enough interest to watch the next few shows knowing the angle they're taking....so you'll have to make the effort yourself next time - good luck!

I think that is very misleading, and I have tried to explain this before. During bb11, PEJ described how the show was made, and there were story producers and story producing shifts, etc, but there was nothing that suggested any of that was new.

BB does not have totally unique events. But the sort of events BB does have would not make the job impossible, so that they'd have to create situations. BB sometimes creates situations to force the "entertainment" or "drama", and I suppose every task or twist creates situations to some extent, but that's not because it would otherwise be impossible to find any stories in what happened.


What do you think make it "finally out there Cost wasn't the reason a feed isn't back"?

So true.

I think Kav has very low self esteem and he's quite happy to join in when others are getting bitched about or singled out as he's likely happy that the negative attention is not being focused on him so he revels in it. He aligned himself with the group that were seen as the strongest in the house as I don't think he could have handled any criticism being levelled towards him and he wanted to play it 'safe'.

Look at how he reacted to the twitter comments the other night, he sought reassurance straightaway and needed to be told how great he was. He's the type of person that can't take criticism/insults but is happy to dish them out as it deflects stuff away from him.

Even the guy called Tom remarked on how the producers used certain footage to portray story lines that they were interested in. We never got to see how manipulative Anna Nolan was, how the girls liked drinking every night, how unstable Nicola was and how both Tom was smoking a cigarette next to Nick Bateman who was the pantomime villain.

Nadia Almada got a very favourable edit the year she won : apparently she was a lot more unpleasant than she was portrayed (when she returned to UBB, we got to see the real her and she left to boos)

IMO there are a few things as to why this type of show has changed -

- re BB, the decision to put Nikki Grahame back in after viewers paid to vote her out was never truly forgot or forgiven by hardcore fans of the show. Phil Edgar-Jones has even put his hands up and admitted on record it was a very bad decision by himself.
- the whole Jade/Shilpa episode
-the vote-rigging scandal of ITV shows, especially when it involved the likes of Ant & Dec.

The British public are cynical, but not stupid. TV producers have learnt that cheap tv + viewers voting money = success has or is now dying a death. But that viewers still want 'realistic' drama and enjoy the voyeuristic nature of it. They want to believe it's real because it appears so.

I like the show on Channel 5, but I do think they do anything for ratings, and it's not a show worth wasting your money on. They need to get the free 5 votes like X Factor did with the app. It's not Big Brother from back in the day, it's a heavily edited show to get headlines and make cash. I enjoy the show, I like Emma and Rylan too, but the producers go overboard with trying to make it controversial. We all wanted a few rules broken now and then in Big Brother, to have people come back and go to hidden rooms etc, we wanted a few truths shown on the screens to shock the house, but Channel 5 overdoes it so it loses effect I think. They want controversy and conflict and it's obvious by all the tasks that are there to wind the house up. Good viewing, but it's not a natural show like it used to be on Channel 4.

What do you mean? I don't remember exactly how we knew about John Jame's phone call, but I don't think it was rumours or conjecture. And didn't we also have Chanelle return as part of a task and talk with Ziggy about outside opportunities? So far as I can recall, we knew about that because we saw it.

The more I see in this thread, the more it seems that the real issue for many people is something else. For oathy, it relates to the live feed. For some others, it seems to be about feeling Perez was treated unfairly.

From the very first Big Brother has been a gameshow. The contestants all sang so on the very first season.

But it was a reality gameshow - it was a gameshow based on real events.

Now the reality has been largely extracted in favour of production led story lines - albeit that the stories are unscripted from the contestants point of view.

I think, I hope, that the contestants are not yet told what roles to play - but it feels like it's heading that way - if only for the 'lead players'.

Exactly. I never wanted her to win because I didn't find her that entertaining or funny in the slightest. I would have liked Victor to have won.

Never mind this, I'd like to know more of the closed fan sites no one's ever heard of in the first place.

That's actually opened my eyes a lot to be fair. I watched the episode of Nick's ejection and the lead up to it, and its clear that the producers saw potential in a controversy, so dragged it out a tiny bit.

The whole "dead wife" story was quite haunting (especially at the time), as a producer in the 2010 BB documentary said, "we knew he didn't have a wife", but they didn't address it, causing fans to question Nicks behaviour. And then the hidden notes were seen by producers, but they waited for HMs reactions for tension and we hear Craig saying he wanted to smack him one in the night... then that lead to the meeting and Nick's ejection. They could have kicked him out as soon as they saw him writing the first names on the paper, but they waited.

There is 1 thing that makes this all convincing, Perez knew the name of the producer. Now, if my knowledge of 15 years of Big Brother is up to speed, the housemates rarely meet producers/Big Brother conflict of interest sort of thing cropped up, Davina once mention it then Emma said it last year, watch Twitter, I have a sneaking suspicion Perex might reveal who it is.
I'll admit though, it's very ****ing strange and scares me to think I have this much loyalty to a show but I think enoughs enough from me now, if it returns to some sort of format I might consider it, but now, I think it might be time for me to drop it.

Exactly, that's part of my point, they knew the viewers would still vote with their fingers on dials but since C5 took over, and the explosion of the internet, they know that the British public is cynical but they are still drawn to the drama. They know that Towie and Made In Chelsea aren't 'real' but are still hooked.

I meant in terms of a housemate admitting they got information about the show from a producer (I know we've had HMs hear about family or be convinced to stay because to quit is a wasted opportunity, but I don't recall a HM being told about the viewing figures or similar). I'm not saying I agree, just saying I could understand it!

As for your second paragraph, I can't disagree, but then again, everyone sees things differently.

That's the real issue though. Channel 5 & Endemol have never come out and said publically that the format has changed, it is still billed as Big Brother, the same as in 2000 as it is today, and for arguments sake, lets say Ofcom received an official complaint about billing the show as unscripted "real" reality television surely then Channel 5 & Endemol are ****ed, why keep it secret? You can't hide information like this for anything else you pay for in life when you think about it.

It's a total contradiction - 'reality tv', or, 'experiment' - I missed out one of the most important reasons from my post - they have never forgotten the huge 'back-to-basics' mistake of BB4 when viewers watched paint dry - and they wanted to avoid a repeat at ALL costs!